About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
bilateral security and partnerships, and on the accumulations with the big states in asia, like china, india, indonesia. so the challenges are enormous. frankly, the strong leadership from the white house, secretary clinton. we've been able to do a lot, and i think build on some remarkable achievements of the previous administration, including opening to india. i would say so those are the opportunities. ironically for me the biggest challenges are the personal ones. i had a wife was also a senior administration official, and we have young children. and trying to balance figuring out how to be in certain places when you've got pressing either international or domestic kind of family business is remarkably difficult to there's a let down when you're not there for certain things, or the embarrassment when you're diplomatic interlocutor on the phone here's your daughter screaming at the top of her lungs as your trying to negotiate some aspect of an agreement. so i would say, victor, with -- i'm not the one screaming. it's my daughter. [laughter] although it has happened the other way around. so
interests of countries like china and india in the middle east will increase and the role they will attempt to play is bound to increase because their supplies still become imported from at the same time, given the importance of the islamic world and what will accumulate in the region, continues to add interest in stability the new security team will have to do to make nontraditional assessment of heart they imagine the evolution -- and some of this will depend on the outcome of the election over the period of 10 to 15 years iran emerges as a country conducting normal publicity and will continue to be a country influenced with theological evolution. but that will be -- i expect china and india will become more active players in the region >> i will take the brunt of and ask one last question. we were talking earlier outside about a new country on the american foreign policy agenda, me and mar burma. president obama is going there. something is happening. is it important? how does it matter? >> burma is a country with a large population of potential resources, racked by a military government
, if the governors decide we're going to put all the money into india, it's their decision rather than the part of the more strategic decision-making process. congress would get involved if all the money went to one country. >> do you think? [laughter] >> there's certain country's bbg would like to get rid of that congress wouldn't allow and that sort of thing. but i'm guessing it really needs to be part of really part of the foreign policy apparatus. >> i want to open up to question. we have time for about 20 minutes. please keep them brief so we can get as many as possible. go ahead. >> first time i ever saw -- was 1967 in taipei at usia. it was in chinese. but now i work with two groups. one is dhi esper diplomats which serves the diplomatic community here in washington, and arranges events to show them what goes on you. also people to people international who post the foreign officers at the national defense university. was happen with this is weak, and we take these our homes and arrange events with them, then go back to the home countries and remember us. when diplomats wife went to thail
to push all the money out into the economy that is in india, because everyone is afraid to stand. i'd just like to point out the great depression went on for more than 10 years after this rooseveltian seamers started but if you count the world war ii as a statement, which even barack obama's economic adviser, christina romer has refuted the idea that the war actually ended the depression, you know, none of that, the actual original failure of keynesian was during the depression and yet nobody saw that way. but if we're going to take that serious, take the idea that taking up slack in demand is what we need to do, how much do we need to spend? what is the dollar figure that government needs to put out? >> are you asking? >> yeah. >> there's a lot of debate about this. it's hard to come with a precise figure because we are human beings and we do the best -- >> the keynesians are the ones who believe that everything is trackable to these complex mathematical formulas with all kinds of greek letters and stuff. [inaudible] >> there was internal debate in the obama administration how big is the
to be in this new century where we've got rising competition in china and germany and india and if we're going to have an american century we cannot come in second place to those countries in technology of the future. and i think that played an important role. there was a sense that the obama vision was one that they thought better suited this moment in our country's history. and there is no question on social issues whether it's women's healthcare or immigration. there was asset of issues that for younger voters was important to think about the kind of country and kind of president they wanted representing them. so on all those questions people wrestled carefully. i think that's why ultimately enough people in enough battleground states chose the president to continue this journey we're on. quickly in terms of demoggrafi. we don't know this for sure but we could be seeing different elections in on years and off years. the election in 2014 is going to be different than presidential lecktorts. and the comments i made were predicated on what we thought would happen in a presidential election. yo
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5